2023 Aston Martin | Aramco | Cognizant F1 Team

[AR3-GP]

Aston Martin have the same rear suspension as Mercedes, so that rules out any pseudo FRIC business.

This loophole theory is way more fun than tires or bad upgrades...so let's run with it

Maybe they had a hole in the floor due to a loophole or there was some kind of bypass solution feeding air into the floor?

[AR3-GP]

There is a current theory that Aston Martin found a loophole at the beginning of the season that the FIA quietly closed down.

This team has aggressively pursued the edge of the regulations in the last 2-3 seasons so it wouldn't surprise me if this is what happened. It's a very clever group. The armchair rear wing from last season. The W10...

[KimiRai]

This team has aggressively pursued the edge of the regulations in the last 2-3 seasons so it wouldn't surprise me if this is what happened. It's a very clever group. The armchair rear wing from last season. The W10...

Eric Blandin did mention back in January that they found rule loopholes which allowed for clever innovations but not sure whether that is related at all. The 2019 Ferrari engine closed door negotiations despite not knowing the specifics of the agreement its "existence" was published publicly so it's weird that in the case there was some talks with the FIA and Aston it's not being picked up by more people than just one or two voices.

[jofs89]

There is a current theory that Aston Martin found a loophole at the beginning of the season that the FIA quietly closed down.

According to
@f1talks
: Ted Kravitz pressed Mike Krack during an interview on the subject of misguided tweaks and changes to the car.

An interesting theme of changes forced on Aston Martin by the FIA came up in conversation. The team boss neither confirmed nor denied.

A statement by Matt Kew also indicates something suspicious:

Matt Kew: - “I can't say too much, but there is a clear reason for Aston Martin drop-off which is not quite to do with development direction.

If there is any truth in it then its safe to assume that AM must have got something big in return. Whenever FIA tries to do something like this behind doors ; there is something substantial in offer to other party.

I personally think it's very plausible. As I've mentioned in previous posts. The drop off from Canada to the subsequent races was too significant to the ultimate pace (nothing to do with McLaren and Mercedes upgrades as they weren't the ultimate pace setter i.e RBR) I don't recall ever seeing such an immediate drop off and significant drop off in performance.

To go from an upgrade that puts you within a few seconds of race win (without lift and coast) to over a minute behind a couple of races later. Did seem fishy to me.

There are obviously many possible factors but i think the loophole theory sounds the most likely to me. Just my two cents.

[scuderiabrandon]

I agree this alll sounds way too tinfoily for now. With the timelines we have it seems most likely to be a case of failed upgrades. Personally I don't think it coming after a major upgrade package is just a coincidence. The nearest truths are either failed upgrades or other teams simply struggling more at the start, so we have no choice but to accept it as the truth until provided with more conclusive evidence for something else.

I have no problem with speculation but some people take at face value and run with it spreading misleading information.

[AR3-GP]

Adding to the potential tinfoil theories, the question would be, what could they have removed from the car which is out of sight? This leaves very little to the imagination. It's a Mercedes PU and rear end. There's little freedom there.

That would leave few options like:
1) a mechanical solution in the front suspension
2) a mass damper
3) A duct of air flowing to where it should not be...

[AR3-GP]

This team has aggressively pursued the edge of the regulations in the last 2-3 seasons so it wouldn't surprise me if this is what happened. It's a very clever group. The armchair rear wing from last season. The W10...

Eric Blandin did mention back in January that they found rule loopholes which allowed for clever innovations but not sure whether that is related at all. The 2019 Ferrari engine closed door negotiations despite not knowing the specifics of the agreement its "existence" was published publicly so it's weird that in the case there was some talks with the FIA and Aston it's not being picked up by more people than just one or two voices.

The Ferrari situation was not very private though. Teams were finger pointing Ferrari all throughout 2019. At this point, no one has any clue what Aston could have been doing as it is not as easy to finger point as a PU irregularity.

[jofs89]

I agree this alll sounds way too tinfoily for now. With the timelines we have it seems most likely to be a case of failed upgrades. Personally I don't think it coming after a major upgrade package is just a coincidence. The nearest truths are either failed upgrades or other teams simply struggling more at the start, so we have no choice but to accept it as the truth until provided with more conclusive evidence for something else.

I have no problem with speculation but some people take at face value and run with it spreading misleading information.

I would normally tend to agree. However, the fly in the ointment is that the Canada upgrade did seem to work. They were the most competitive any team has been compared to the Red Bull on race pace in that race.

I find it hard to believe ALL of the subsequent deficit can be explained away through the characteristics of the recent tracks. Though obviously very much not impossible. Just seemed odd to me then and seems odd to me now.

[scuderiabrandon]

I agree this alll sounds way too tinfoily for now. With the timelines we have it seems most likely to be a case of failed upgrades. Personally I don't think it coming after a major upgrade package is just a coincidence. The nearest truths are either failed upgrades or other teams simply struggling more at the start, so we have no choice but to accept it as the truth until provided with more conclusive evidence for something else.

I have no problem with speculation but some people take at face value and run with it spreading misleading information.

I would normally tend to agree. However, the fly in the ointment is that the Canada upgrade did seem to work. They were the most competitive any team has been compared to the Red Bull on race pace in that race.

I find it hard to believe ALL of the subsequent deficit can be explained away through the characteristics of the recent tracks. Though obviously very much not impossible. Just seemed odd to me then and seems odd to me now.

There is a lot to consider with the Canadian GP. Ferrari were really competitive, probably 2nd force but due to being out of place in qualifying had to opt for the 1 stop and couldn't really fight forward. I recall FA and LH having a battle. AM and MB were quite close in that race where I believe MB should've been much weaker due to the rear limited nature of the circuit.

Then again you look at races where Max was in the lead, all he does is push until the gap is big enough to start managing. Austria is a good example after the early SC, opens the gap in a blink of an eye, him not shifting into 8th gear into T1 in Silverstone and him also confirming it himself [re: managing after getting into the lead] after the Belgian GP. My point is it is hard to read into the gap toRed Bull because they simply aren'r revealing entire hand unless neccessary.

The car went from a traction monster to being competitive in the straights but not really anywhere else anymore. Now myself being a supporter of a specific team knows that this is exactly what happened to us from '22-'23 trying to compete with RB in a straight line.

Teams across the grid don't like to admit if upgrades have failed. They always give the "we need more time to understand this package" excuse.

I look at the recent updates and to me this almost looks like a reversal of the Canada update.

[jofs89]

I agree this alll sounds way too tinfoily for now. With the timelines we have it seems most likely to be a case of failed upgrades. Personally I don't think it coming after a major upgrade package is just a coincidence. The nearest truths are either failed upgrades or other teams simply struggling more at the start, so we have no choice but to accept it as the truth until provided with more conclusive evidence for something else.

I have no problem with speculation but some people take at face value and run with it spreading misleading information.

I would normally tend to agree. However, the fly in the ointment is that the Canada upgrade did seem to work. They were the most competitive any team has been compared to the Red Bull on race pace in that race.

I find it hard to believe ALL of the subsequent deficit can be explained away through the characteristics of the recent tracks. Though obviously very much not impossible. Just seemed odd to me then and seems odd to me now.

There is a lot to consider with the Canadian GP. Ferrari were really competitive, probably 2nd force but due to being out of place in qualifying had to opt for the 1 stop and couldn't really fight forward. I recall FA and LH having a battle. AM and MB were quite close in that race where I believe MB should've been much weaker due to the rear limited nature of the circuit.

Then again you look at races where Max was in the lead, all he does is push until the gap is big enough to start managing. Austria is a good example after the early SC, opens the gap in a blink of an eye, him not shifting into 8th gear into T1 in Silverstone and him also confirming it himself [re: managing after getting into the lead] after the Belgian GP. My point is it is hard to read into the gap toRed Bull because they simply aren'r revealing entire hand unless neccessary.

The car went from a traction monster to being competitive in the straights but not really anywhere else anymore. Now myself being a supporter of a specific team knows that this is exactly what happened to us from '22-'23 trying to compete with RB in a straight line.

Teams across the grid don't like to admit if upgrades have failed. They always give the "we need more time to understand this package" excuse.

I look at the recent updates and to me this almost looks like a reversal of the Canada update.

https://ibb.co/s2QZqgD

Yes, this is also very plausible. Canada being a bit of an outlier track probably does muddy the waters more than I am appreciating. Also, it is a good point about Red Bull not always revealing their full hand. I do think that race AM was pretty competitive though, not too far behind them.

I mean if your applying Occam's razor you're hypothesis is probably more likely to be correct. However, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if there was some validity to the speculation.

I actually just looked back at my own lap time analysis and AM was as far off the pace in Spain as in Silverstone and that was before the big upgrade so maybe that would strengthen your take on it.

What are your thoughts on the Zandvoort upgrade package? I hear there's a new floor and sidepods coming?

[AR3-GP]

[

There is a lot to consider with the Canadian GP. Ferrari were really competitive, probably 2nd force but due to being out of place in qualifying had to opt for the 1 stop and couldn't really fight forward. I recall FA and LH having a battle. AM and MB were quite close in that race where I believe MB should've been much weaker due to the rear limited nature of the circuit.

Alonso had the issue that he was managing though. I think he could have dropped Hamilton by some margin without it.

[scuderiabrandon]

I would normally tend to agree. However, the fly in the ointment is that the Canada upgrade did seem to work. They were the most competitive any team has been compared to the Red Bull on race pace in that race.

I find it hard to believe ALL of the subsequent deficit can be explained away through the characteristics of the recent tracks. Though obviously very much not impossible. Just seemed odd to me then and seems odd to me now.

There is a lot to consider with the Canadian GP. Ferrari were really competitive, probably 2nd force but due to being out of place in qualifying had to opt for the 1 stop and couldn't really fight forward. I recall FA and LH having a battle. AM and MB were quite close in that race where I believe MB should've been much weaker due to the rear limited nature of the circuit.

Then again you look at races where Max was in the lead, all he does is push until the gap is big enough to start managing. Austria is a good example after the early SC, opens the gap in a blink of an eye, him not shifting into 8th gear into T1 in Silverstone and him also confirming it himself [re: managing after getting into the lead] after the Belgian GP. My point is it is hard to read into the gap toRed Bull because they simply aren'r revealing entire hand unless neccessary.

The car went from a traction monster to being competitive in the straights but not really anywhere else anymore. Now myself being a supporter of a specific team knows that this is exactly what happened to us from '22-'23 trying to compete with RB in a straight line.

Teams across the grid don't like to admit if upgrades have failed. They always give the "we need more time to understand this package" excuse.

I look at the recent updates and to me this almost looks like a reversal of the Canada update.

https://ibb.co/s2QZqgD

Yes, this is also very plausible. Canada being a bit of an outlier track probably does muddy the waters more than I am appreciating. Also, it is a good point about Red Bull not always revealing their full hand. I do think that race AM was pretty competitive though, not too far behind them.

I mean if your applying Occam's razor you're hypothesis is probably more likely to be correct. However, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if there was some validity to the speculation.

I actually just looked back at my own lap time analysis and AM was as far off the pace in Spain as in Silverstone and that was before the big upgrade so maybe that would strengthen your take on it.

What are your thoughts on the Zandvoort upgrade package? I hear there's a new floor and sidepods coming?

We've heard a variety of things by now, loopholes closed down, failed upgrades, new pirelli tyres etc etc etc. Like I said, I have to take the most probable scenario that has the most evidence to back it as the nearest truth until I'm proven otherwise.

I have no problem with the speculation, I quite enjoy the interesting theories, but people will spread this as if it were to be the absolute truth.

[Re: Zandvoort update] I am not quite sure at this very moment.

[diffuser]

I agree this alll sounds way too tinfoily for now. With the timelines we have it seems most likely to be a case of failed upgrades. Personally I don't think it coming after a major upgrade package is just a coincidence. The nearest truths are either failed upgrades or other teams simply struggling more at the start, so we have no choice but to accept it as the truth until provided with more conclusive evidence for something else.

I have no problem with speculation but some people take at face value and run with it spreading misleading information.

I would normally tend to agree. However, the fly in the ointment is that the Canada upgrade did seem to work. They were the most competitive any team has been compared to the Red Bull on race pace in that race.

I find it hard to believe ALL of the subsequent deficit can be explained away through the characteristics of the recent tracks. Though obviously very much not impossible. Just seemed odd to me then and seems odd to me now.

There is a lot to consider with the Canadian GP. Ferrari were really competitive, probably 2nd force but due to being out of place in qualifying had to opt for the 1 stop and couldn't really fight forward. I recall FA and LH having a battle. AM and MB were quite close in that race where I believe MB should've been much weaker due to the rear limited nature of the circuit.

Then again you look at races where Max was in the lead, all he does is push until the gap is big enough to start managing. Austria is a good example after the early SC, opens the gap in a blink of an eye, him not shifting into 8th gear into T1 in Silverstone and him also confirming it himself [re: managing after getting into the lead] after the Belgian GP. My point is it is hard to read into the gap toRed Bull because they simply aren'r revealing entire hand unless neccessary.

The car went from a traction monster to being competitive in the straights but not really anywhere else anymore. Now myself being a supporter of a specific team knows that this is exactly what happened to us from '22-'23 trying to compete with RB in a straight line.

Teams across the grid don't like to admit if upgrades have failed. They always give the "we need more time to understand this package" excuse.

I look at the recent updates and to me this almost looks like a reversal of the Canada update.

https://ibb.co/s2QZqgD

So that picture doesn't do the preCanada version justice and it kind of cut off the Belgium upgrade. The PreCanada had a real minimal undercut. The Canada nad Belgium is still much deeper. They have restored the initial convex shape as opposed to a concave shape in Post Canada, Pre Belgium.


Fun fact Stroll Ran the Canada version all weekend, while Alonso ran the new version. I didn't see anything but the usual pace difference between the two. So I wonder which way they go?

[scuderiabrandon]

[

There is a lot to consider with the Canadian GP. Ferrari were really competitive, probably 2nd force but due to being out of place in qualifying had to opt for the 1 stop and couldn't really fight forward. I recall FA and LH having a battle. AM and MB were quite close in that race where I believe MB should've been much weaker due to the rear limited nature of the circuit.

Alonso had the issue that he was managing though. I think he could have dropped Hamilton by some margin without it.

I also recall him saying "it was like 70 laps of qualifying" in a post race interview

[organic]

So that picture doesn't do the preCanada version justice and it kind of cut off the Belgium upgrade. The PreCanada had a real minimal undercut. The Canada nad Belgium is still much deeper. They have restored the initial convex shape as opposed to a concave shape in Post Canada, Pre Belgium.


Fun fact Stroll Ran the Canada version all weekend, while Alonso ran the new version. I didn't see anything but the usual pace difference between the two. So I wonder which way they go?

Are you sure stroll ran the Canada version on Friday? I heard somewhere he damaged his final set of Belgian floor parts in his SQ2 incident and had to go back to old spec floor parts